Tria v ReAura
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skincare Tools & Do-It-Yourself Skincare

free skin care · Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:19 pm

Hi everyone. I haven't been here for a long time - couple of dreadful years put skincare at the bottom of my list of priorities.

Anyway, I've read both threads regarding these devices and noticed that Photoqueen has both but there's no definitive preference. I would much prefer the cheaper one but "glamplusforty" blog shows some pretty good results for the ReAura, especially on her upper lip, which is what I want it for.

Do they basically give the same results with the only difference being cost?

Would appreciate help if someone feels able to give it.

free skin care · Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:35 pm

I am sure they are both great machines, but I personally picked the ReAura because they partnered with Fraxel when creating both the home laser and the skin products (gel and aftercare lotion). And Fraxel is definitely the expert in fractionated laser resurfacing.

It also personally bothered me that Tria is in a lawsuit for patent infringement for their laser hair removal device, and I preferred to pick a manufacturer and a device that would be supported for a number of years when I am spending a chunk of cash.

The fact that ReAura could only be used 2x a week ( vs daily like the Tria ) also meant that I was picking the strongest home device available, and I would rather have more impact per treatment vs. more frequent weaker treatments.

But as mentioned above, they both have great potential.

free skin care · Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:51 pm

I have the Tria and I am delighted with it. I find the main downside perhaps obviously, is having to use it nightly. I chose the Tria because I was reluctant to have to use a gel, and of course the price difference. If I was purchasing again....I would be leaning towards the ReAura.

HTH

free skin care · Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:41 am

I have the tria and I chose it because I have asian/ british skin so I am sort of tan/olive colour and can go pigmented with spot scarring. The tria is designed for any skin type, I checked
both speaking to them and reading , whereas the Reaura when it first came out on its website said for that for some skin types ( I think fitzpatrick
!V up) it wasnt recommended and I took fright!!

Probably my overreaction, but I absolutely love the Tria, and am sooo glad I got it.

Also with PQ"s review that really made me jump at it( Thanks PQ)

Honestly, I dont think theres a lot in it, I think they are pretty similar.

HTH

free skin care · Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:13 am

If I had to make a decision between the two device and send one back, I would take either of them, as I have had great results with both devices.

I do like the Tria, as I don't have to use gel, which makes the treatment easier.

PQ

Thu Jan 10, 2013 6:29 am

New to the forum and first time post. I have been using Reaura since Nov 2011, shortly after its launch. I am currently on my 4th course of treatment. It is truly amazing - have tried various home devices over the years with mixed results - and Reaura is by far the most imressive. For me Reaura all day long. As already mentioned, Fraxel is the gold standard and the support from Space NK and Phillips is first rate. Reaura is more powerful than the Tria and twice weekly treatments is both manageable and endurable - I just couldn't stick to a nightly routine. That final point for me is the deal breaker. But it is an individual preference. I have to say also that results really are accumulative. They just get better and the skin becomes more accepting - redness and stinging sensation following treatment is very bareable now.

free skin care · Thu Jan 10, 2013 6:48 am

photoqueen wrote:

If I had to make a decision between the two device and send one back, I would take either of them, as I have had great results with both devices.

I do like the Tria, as I don't have to use gel, which makes the treatment easier.

PQ

How fortunate we are to have PQ on board here for reviews.....not only is he knowledgable but he has a stash of great devices to review. Since he has both units and gives a thumbs up for each we can't go wrong with either one!!!

free skin care · Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:17 am

Thank you all for your replies - much appreciated. I take the point about the fraxel technology and support. I also see how it might be easier to keep up with twice a week rather than every night.

However... no gel needed for the Tria and it's almost half the price...

Heck, maybe I should just do eeny, meeny... Confused

I think, on balance, I might go for the ReAura but some more thinking first.

Thanks again, everyone.

free skin care · Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:55 pm

I just went to the home pages for tria and reaura.. I do realize that skin texture and tone improvements are hard to depict in before n after photos but I didnt even see much difference in the wrinkles in before n after.. there was only one b & a at reaura that should some improvements in the cheek wrinkles....

there was a definite improvement in sunspots though...

also, I do wonder if some of the " healthy " looking skin is due to the inflammation caused by the lasers resulting in some plumpness ...

and please all the tria n reaura lasers lovers, pls don't take offense, I am just wondering n asking ... may be I just need to lower my expectations regarding age reversal...

free skin care · Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:52 am

daler wrote:

also, I do wonder if some of the " healthy " looking skin is due to the inflammation caused by the lasers resulting in some plumpness ...

These home lasers are really designed for light resurfacing, though the amount of collagen development really remains to be seen. Unless the healthy skin photos were taken at least 4 - 6 months after the last treatments, line elimination could very well be due to microinflammation. The same is true with PMD, dermarolling, etc.

I think healthy skepticism is appropriate, but I am still going to keep trying various options. Smile

free skin care · Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:02 am

daler wrote:

I just went to the home pages for tria and reaura.. I do realize that skin texture and tone improvements are hard to depict in before n after photos but I didnt even see much difference in the wrinkles in before n after.. there was only one b & a at reaura that should some improvements in the cheek wrinkles....

there was a definite improvement in sunspots though...

also, I do wonder if some of the " healthy " looking skin is due to the inflammation caused by the lasers resulting in some plumpness ...

and please all the tria n reaura lasers lovers, pls don't take offense, I am just wondering n asking ... may be I just need to lower my expectations regarding age reversal...

I think it is good to question and find out if these devices actually deliver results.

I think a the combination of my testing of of the Reuara on EDS and the review of the Tria on my blog show that these devices work, and the inflammation issue, could be an issue, but not in this case.

PQ

free skin care · Sun Jan 13, 2013 2:32 am

daler wrote:

I just went to the home pages for tria and reaura.. I do realize that skin texture and tone improvements are hard to depict in before n after photos but I didnt even see much difference in the wrinkles in before n after.. there was only one b & a at reaura that should some improvements in the cheek wrinkles....

there was a definite improvement in sunspots though...

also, I do wonder if some of the " healthy " looking skin is due to the inflammation caused by the lasers resulting in some plumpness ...

and please all the tria n reaura lasers lovers, pls don't take offense, I am just wondering n asking ... may be I just need to lower my expectations regarding age reversal...

I was skeptical (but hopeful) when I purchased Tria. Nothing has ever worked for me (except botox and fillers) even retin A and Vitamin C have shown little results. So I was fairly stunned to see quite a quick improvement in my pigmentation, but more noticeably some undefinable improvement, perhaps more smoothness and plumpness of the skin. No one has noticed these changes except me and I doubt it would be particularly evident in a photograph, however I would call the improvements subtle but substantial!!! I cant wait to see what future treatment phases yield.

Oh (edited to add) definitely not from inflammation as the changes have been maintained well after the first treatment phase ended!

free skin care · Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:37 pm

Well, I picked up my ReAura today and have just done my first treatment, which was both better and worse than I anticipated: better because it wasn't as uncomfortable as I feared it would be, and worse because it was more uncomfortable than I hoped Smile

I have a question for Photoqueen, if he sees this (or anyone else): I also have a Baby Quasar and the Stop device from way back when I first discovered EDS. How would I work either or both of these into a routine incorporating the ReAura?

free skin care · Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:17 am

This is a fantastic and very helpful thread to those of us making purchase considerations.

Thank you, BFG

free skin care · Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:33 pm

Cesce wrote:

Well, I picked up my ReAura today and have just done my first treatment, which was both better and worse than I anticipated: better because it wasn't as uncomfortable as I feared it would be, and worse because it was more uncomfortable than I hoped Smile

I have a question for Photoqueen, if he sees this (or anyone else): I also have a Baby Quasar and the Stop device from way back when I first discovered EDS. How would I work either or both of these into a routine incorporating the ReAura?

1.ReAura treatment
Resting day - Baby Quasar

2.Rest period from ReAura

3.Stop treatments plus Baby Quasar

4.Rest period

5. ReAura treatments

Then give your skin a good rest.

PQ

free skin care · Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:34 am

Many thanks Photoqueen. Here's hoping I can undo at least some of the neglect of the last couple of years. I'm really grateful for your advice.

free skin care · Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:15 am

Cesce wrote:

Many thanks Photoqueen. Here's hoping I can undo at least some of the neglect of the last couple of years. I'm really grateful for your advice.

I note you have sensitive skin, be very careful you don't overload your skin with too many challenging treatments, you are the best judge if your skin is coping, if redness doesn't fade after 8-10 hours after a ReAura, you are over doing it, redness and the heat from the Stop treatment should fade within an hour, if you aren't getting this type of recovery, slow down and give your skin a rest, when it normalises again, you can restart the treatments. Don't over do it!

pQ

free skin care · Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:39 am

photoqueen wrote:

Cesce wrote:

Many thanks Photoqueen. Here's hoping I can undo at least some of the neglect of the last couple of years. I'm really grateful for your advice.

I note you have sensitive skin, be very careful you don't overload your skin with too many challenging treatments, you are the best judge if your skin is coping, if redness doesn't fade after 8-10 hours after a ReAura, you are over doing it, redness and the heat from the Stop treatment should fade within an hour, if you aren't getting this type of recovery, slow down and give your skin a rest, when it normalises again, you can restart the treatments. Don't over do it!

pQ

I was a bit apprehensive about the ReAura, but the fiery redness had abated enough after three hours that I would happily have gone shopping without makeup (I did use a cool gel pack). I get very little redness and heat from the Stop treatment.

I've suffered a lot with eczema in the past (whole body... oral steroids...the lot)but luckily never on my face. I think perhaps my skin is not as sensitive as I thought. Incidentally, the Baby Quasar was, for me, really helpful for eczema - just throwing that out there in case it helps someone else.

Thank you again for your advice and concern.

Sat Jan 19, 2013 5:53 am

i email tria and phillips do gent mor infos...

Tria laiser is 5nm stronger than the Reaura but people says here that they think that the Reaura make more redness in skin and be stronger...

here the data:
Phillips ReAura:

Laser Class:1M
Laser Type:Diode
Output wavelength: 1435nm

TRIA:
The Tria Skin Rejuvenating Laser is a Class 1M laser, with an output wavelength of 1440nm and 12m/J pulse max.

Setting 1: 30 seconds per ‘zone’(2 minutes treatment overall) 5mJ
Setting 2: 1 minute per ‘zone’ (4 minutes treatment overall) 10mJ
Setting 3: 2.5 minutes per ‘zone’ (10 minutes treatment overall) 12mJ

Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:44 am

I'd love to get my hands on the reaura, but since browsing this forum I found out about the Tria.. Initially I thought the reaura was the only option so I'm grateful to discover there's a cheaper alternative. I feel as though I've already wasted my money on the Rio 60 second facelift (I wish I'd found this forum before purchasing that!).. I wish I'd have put that money towards a Tria or even the Nuface trinity (hopefully it will come to the UK). Anyway, I will be keeping a close eye on the forum to see who likes what and if the Tria gives as good results as the reaura.

I first found out about the reaura through some beauty bloggers.. I have to say though, at least 3 of them had nothing wrong with their skin, they were in their early 20's, no wrinkles, no sun damage and not one of them posted before and after pictures, they did gush about it yet at the same time they didnt seem to be convinced it had actually done anything for them.. Which isn't surprising I guess!? Still, I suppose sending it to them worked as that's the way I discovered it and so will have many others like me probably. There was one blogger who posted photos etc and it clearly worked for her and since then I've wanted to buy it!

I'm 33 this year and I just want to give my skin that clean, even looking appearance it used to have, id like to work on some lines on my forehead and brows and the lip to nose lines.. I feel like my skin is showing the first signs of ageing and I just want to hopefully reverse it a little or at least keep it from getting too much worse.
I'm glad I found this forum but I do feel quite lost, I have nowhere near as much knowledge as most of the people on here. When once my only concern was keeping spots at bay, I now find myself needing to look at anti ageing.. But I feel like I've been thrown in at the deep end with no idea where to begin!

I looked at PQ video review of the Tria and from the posts it seems like the Tria gives the reaura a good run for the money, but also from the posts I've read there seems to have been one or two faulty tria lasers and this puts me off.. The Philips seems like a good name to trust, but a its just that price.. Ouch!
Does anyone know if the reaura is only meant to last the same length of time as the Tria, 5 yrs?

Sorry for my first post rambles!

X

free skin care · Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:39 pm

Nikki2013 wrote:

I'd love to get my hands on the reaura, but since browsing this forum I found out about the Tria.. Initially I thought the reaura was the only option so I'm grateful to discover there's a cheaper alternative. I feel as though I've already wasted my money on the Rio 60 second facelift (I wish I'd found this forum before purchasing that!).. I wish I'd have put that money towards a Tria or even the Nuface trinity (hopefully it will come to the UK). Anyway, I will be keeping a close eye on the forum to see who likes what and if the Tria gives as good results as the reaura.

I first found out about the reaura through some beauty bloggers.. I have to say though, at least 3 of them had nothing wrong with their skin, they were in their early 20's, no wrinkles, no sun damage and not one of them posted before and after pictures, they did gush about it yet at the same time they didnt seem to be convinced it had actually done anything for them.. Which isn't surprising I guess!? Still, I suppose sending it to them worked as that's the way I discovered it and so will have many others like me probably. There was one blogger who posted photos etc and it clearly worked for her and since then I've wanted to buy it!

I'm 33 this year and I just want to give my skin that clean, even looking appearance it used to have, id like to work on some lines on my forehead and brows and the lip to nose lines.. I feel like my skin is showing the first signs of ageing and I just want to hopefully reverse it a little or at least keep it from getting too much worse.
I'm glad I found this forum but I do feel quite lost, I have nowhere near as much knowledge as most of the people on here. When once my only concern was keeping spots at bay, I now find myself needing to look at anti ageing.. But I feel like I've been thrown in at the deep end with no idea where to begin!

I looked at PQ video review of the Tria and from the posts it seems like the Tria gives the reaura a good run for the money, but also from the posts I've read there seems to have been one or two faulty tria lasers and this puts me off.. The Philips seems like a good name to trust, but a its just that price.. Ouch!
Does anyone know if the reaura is only meant to last the same length of time as the Tria, 5 yrs?

Sorry for my first post rambles!

X

Welcome to EDS.

In my view there has only been a very number of faulty Tria devices. I am a great supporter of both the Tria and the ReAura devices, they both work.

If price is an issue, then the Tria is a good product with excellent customer services.

The life of the device depends on the use, but on average is 5 years plus.

PQ

free skin care · Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:41 am

Nikki2013 I'm the same age as you and I wonder what others here think of using one of these in their early 30's? I am seriously thinking of getting the tria.

BTW, thanks so much for this thread. I think a comparison thread really helps.

free skin care · Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:01 am

cam4 wrote:

i email tria and phillips do gent mor infos...

Tria laiser is 5nm stronger than the Reaura but people says here that they think that the Reaura make more redness in skin and be stronger...

here the data:
Phillips ReAura:

Laser Class:1M
Laser Type:Diode
Output wavelength: 1435nm

TRIA:
The Tria Skin Rejuvenating Laser is a Class 1M laser, with an output wavelength of 1440nm and 12m/J pulse max.

Setting 1: 30 seconds per ï¿½zoneï¿½(2 minutes treatment overall) 5mJ
Setting 2: 1 minute per ï¿½zoneï¿½ (4 minutes treatment overall) 10mJ
Setting 3: 2.5 minutes per ï¿½zoneï¿½ (10 minutes treatment overall) 12mJ

So then which one is better for the skin? And what is the difference between fractional and non-ablative as far as better for anti-aging?
On one side people say the Tria is more powerful but then say the Reaura is better on the skin - is that because you use it longer on those 2 days a week?

free skin care · Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:46 pm

DebM wrote:

cam4 wrote:

i email tria and phillips do gent mor infos...

Tria laiser is 5nm stronger than the Reaura but people says here that they think that the Reaura make more redness in skin and be stronger...

here the data:
Phillips ReAura:

Laser Class:1M
Laser Type:Diode
Output wavelength: 1435nm

TRIA:
The Tria Skin Rejuvenating Laser is a Class 1M laser, with an output wavelength of 1440nm and 12m/J pulse max.

Setting 1: 30 seconds per ‘zone’(2 minutes treatment overall) 5mJ
Setting 2: 1 minute per ‘zone’ (4 minutes treatment overall) 10mJ
Setting 3: 2.5 minutes per ‘zone’ (10 minutes treatment overall) 12mJ

So then which one is better for the skin? And what is the difference between fractional and non-ablative as far as better for anti-aging?
On one side people say the Tria is more powerful but then say the Reaura is better on the skin - is that because you use it longer on those 2 days a week?

Hi DebM- this is something I wrote earlier in the Tria thread that might help explain the difference.

I was just watching PQ video and I think I might have come up with the "missing piece of information" between the power/strength of the Tria vs ReAura laser.

I did a comparison earlier were I looked at what available information we had on the two lasers and come to the conclusion that both lasers had similar power strength but I was never able to get over how one could be used 7 days a week vs 2. I think I have come up with a plausible explanation. When I was watching the video I noticed how large the laser window was on the Tria compared to the ReAura. It is a much longer opening. This got me thinking if that could make the laser strength of power/intensity that comes from that opening weaker. It can. Basically my DH explained it to me this way. If you have a 100 watt light bulb that is lighten a whole room vs a 100 watt light bulb that is just lighten a table, the intensity of that light just lighten the table is going to be a lot stronger.

Below is a reference that explains it in more technical terms. I don't know this for sure since I don't own both lasers and doubt either company will give us their proprietary information but this makes sense to me. What do you think?

http://www.rp-photonics.com/optical_intensity.html

This is where I did the original math comparing the 2 lasers.

CookieD wrote:

brierrose wrote:

Thanks CookieD for posting the ReAura specs.

For the Tria:

Charging Cradle Electrical Input: 100-240 VAC at 50-60Hz, 0.2 A max

Laser Output: Class 1M, 1440nm, 12mJ/pulse max

ReAura Specs
Device
Rated voltage 100V-240V
Rated frequency 50HZ-60HZ
Rated input 16W
Protection rating IP 30 (EN60529)
Battery Lithium-ion 3.7V, 1300 mAh

Laser
Laser class 1M
Laser type Diode
Output wavelength 1435nm
Maximum output power 1.5W
Pulse output duration <9 ms

So far it looks like they are both the same type of laser class. They seem to have similar output wavelength 1435nm for ReAura and I am assuming, maybe wrongly that the 1440nm number is referring to output wavelength. Looks like the pulse numbers are different Can anyone tell us what these numbers mean?

I'm having my husband look at this information. He is an engineer and might be able to help me.

CookieD wrote:

Ok. This is what my DH came up with. It looks like the lasers are almost exactly the same energy/power. My husband did make a mathematical mistake earlier in his calculations (before I submitted them) so if someone wants to check the math please feel free to. So if the math below is correct that would mean that the Tria users (on its highest setting) are getting a much bigger dose of laser/power because they are using it 7 days a week vs 2 days a week for ReAura. Now the time of usage is a little different per session. I think in an earlier post I said to do the whole face with ReAura twice a week is approximately 48 minutes (3 area at 6 min. an area times twice a week)and the Tria is approximately 70 minutes. (4 areas at 10 minutes total times 7 days a week)

If all this holds true I am not surprised that some Tria users are having a harder time moving up to level 3. Especially when you consider that you don't use any gel during a treatment. Now don't get me wrong. I am not trying to say one laser is better or worse then another. I'm just saying that if I did a session everyday with the ReAura I think my skin would be very red and I consider my skin to be really tough.

So what does everyone think about this information?

Below is my DH caculations

From the Tria specs:
A joule (J) is an amount of energy or work. It is equal to one watt for one second 1 ws).
A mJ is a millijoule equal to 1/1000 of a joule.
So 12mJ is 12/1000 of a joule or .012J

From the ReAura specs:
The amount of energy or work produced isn’t given but the maximum power (1.5 watts) and the maximum time or duration <9ms are given. You can calculate the maximum amount of energy or work by multiplying them together (the amount of power for an amount of time) .
The duration is <9ms which is “less than” 9 milliseconds (ms) equal to “less than” .009 seconds (a millisecond is 1/1000 second).
To get the maximum energy or work produced in joules multiply the maximum power of 1.5watts times the maximum duration of .009 seconds. 1.5 times .009 equals .0135 watts-seconds (ws) or joules (j).

The Tria is .012j. The ReAura is .0135j. maximum. On the specs of the ReAura it say the maximum power is 1.5 watts. I am assuming that you are getting that full amount of power. Also the duration of pulse is less than 9 milliseconds. It doesn't state exactly how much less. If the pulse duration is closer to .008 milliseconds than the number for ReAura is .012j. Which is the exact same energy/power as the Tria.

free skin care · Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:31 pm

CookieD wrote:

DebM wrote:

cam4 wrote:

i email tria and phillips do gent mor infos...

Tria laiser is 5nm stronger than the Reaura but people says here that they think that the Reaura make more redness in skin and be stronger...

here the data:
Phillips ReAura:

Laser Class:1M
Laser Type:Diode
Output wavelength: 1435nm

TRIA:
The Tria Skin Rejuvenating Laser is a Class 1M laser, with an output wavelength of 1440nm and 12m/J pulse max.

Setting 1: 30 seconds per ‘zone’(2 minutes treatment overall) 5mJ
Setting 2: 1 minute per ‘zone’ (4 minutes treatment overall) 10mJ
Setting 3: 2.5 minutes per ‘zone’ (10 minutes treatment overall) 12mJ

So then which one is better for the skin? And what is the difference between fractional and non-ablative as far as better for anti-aging?
On one side people say the Tria is more powerful but then say the Reaura is better on the skin - is that because you use it longer on those 2 days a week?

Hi DebM- this is something I wrote earlier in the Tria thread that might help explain the difference.

I was just watching PQ video and I think I might have come up with the "missing piece of information" between the power/strength of the Tria vs ReAura laser.

I did a comparison earlier were I looked at what available information we had on the two lasers and come to the conclusion that both lasers had similar power strength but I was never able to get over how one could be used 7 days a week vs 2. I think I have come up with a plausible explanation. When I was watching the video I noticed how large the laser window was on the Tria compared to the ReAura. It is a much longer opening. This got me thinking if that could make the laser strength of power/intensity that comes from that opening weaker. It can. Basically my DH explained it to me this way. If you have a 100 watt light bulb that is lighten a whole room vs a 100 watt light bulb that is just lighten a table, the intensity of that light just lighten the table is going to be a lot stronger.

Below is a reference that explains it in more technical terms. I don't know this for sure since I don't own both lasers and doubt either company will give us their proprietary information but this makes sense to me. What do you think?

http://www.rp-photonics.com/optical_intensity.html

This is where I did the original math comparing the 2 lasers.

CookieD wrote:

brierrose wrote:

Thanks CookieD for posting the ReAura specs.

For the Tria:

Charging Cradle Electrical Input: 100-240 VAC at 50-60Hz, 0.2 A max

Laser Output: Class 1M, 1440nm, 12mJ/pulse max

ReAura Specs
Device
Rated voltage 100V-240V
Rated frequency 50HZ-60HZ
Rated input 16W
Protection rating IP 30 (EN60529)
Battery Lithium-ion 3.7V, 1300 mAh

Laser
Laser class 1M
Laser type Diode
Output wavelength 1435nm
Maximum output power 1.5W
Pulse output duration <9 ms

So far it looks like they are both the same type of laser class. They seem to have similar output wavelength 1435nm for ReAura and I am assuming, maybe wrongly that the 1440nm number is referring to output wavelength. Looks like the pulse numbers are different Can anyone tell us what these numbers mean?

I'm having my husband look at this information. He is an engineer and might be able to help me.

CookieD wrote:

Ok. This is what my DH came up with. It looks like the lasers are almost exactly the same energy/power. My husband did make a mathematical mistake earlier in his calculations (before I submitted them) so if someone wants to check the math please feel free to. So if the math below is correct that would mean that the Tria users (on its highest setting) are getting a much bigger dose of laser/power because they are using it 7 days a week vs 2 days a week for ReAura. Now the time of usage is a little different per session. I think in an earlier post I said to do the whole face with ReAura twice a week is approximately 48 minutes (3 area at 6 min. an area times twice a week)and the Tria is approximately 70 minutes. (4 areas at 10 minutes total times 7 days a week)

If all this holds true I am not surprised that some Tria users are having a harder time moving up to level 3. Especially when you consider that you don't use any gel during a treatment. Now don't get me wrong. I am not trying to say one laser is better or worse then another. I'm just saying that if I did a session everyday with the ReAura I think my skin would be very red and I consider my skin to be really tough.

So what does everyone think about this information?

Below is my DH caculations

From the Tria specs:
A joule (J) is an amount of energy or work. It is equal to one watt for one second 1 ws).
A mJ is a millijoule equal to 1/1000 of a joule.
So 12mJ is 12/1000 of a joule or .012J

From the ReAura specs:
The amount of energy or work produced isn’t given but the maximum power (1.5 watts) and the maximum time or duration <9ms are given. You can calculate the maximum amount of energy or work by multiplying them together (the amount of power for an amount of time) .
The duration is <9ms which is “less than” 9 milliseconds (ms) equal to “less than” .009 seconds (a millisecond is 1/1000 second).
To get the maximum energy or work produced in joules multiply the maximum power of 1.5watts times the maximum duration of .009 seconds. 1.5 times .009 equals .0135 watts-seconds (ws) or joules (j).

The Tria is .012j. The ReAura is .0135j. maximum. On the specs of the ReAura it say the maximum power is 1.5 watts. I am assuming that you are getting that full amount of power. Also the duration of pulse is less than 9 milliseconds. It doesn't state exactly how much less. If the pulse duration is closer to .008 milliseconds than the number for ReAura is .012j. Which is the exact same energy/power as the Tria.

I dont have a head for math (sadly) , but just wanted to say thanks for going to all this trouble Cookie!!

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.